dblanch66
02-04-2007, 09:58 PM
Pro Bowl appearances have alot to do with it to.
Monk 85, 86, 87: 3 Pro Bowls
Irvin 91, 92, 93, 94, 95: 5 Pro Bowls
well sure. Monk was at the end of his career. If both had been playing in their prime at the same time, Monk would have gone to more pro bowls. There was a lack of quality receivers when Irvin was going to pro bowls.
AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace
02-04-2007, 10:18 PM
Pro Bowls aren't all of it...Riggins only went to 1...its just that guys like Riggins have signature plays (70 chip). Its still the most asinine explanation ever though, and if that's the deciding factor, why don't they call it the hall of plays?
AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace
02-04-2007, 10:24 PM
Isn't he on the "All Decade Team" as well???? I'd like to see how many people on an all decade team aren't in the hall of fame
FRPLG
02-04-2007, 10:33 PM
I dont get the whole 'defining catch' bullsh*t excuse. I can't name one defining catch from just about any reciever. Good WRs have LOTS OF GOOD CATCHES. Monk was no different. And just because he wasn't a media whore ass-clown doesn't mean that he wasn't a brilliant WR. The only reason one remembers signature plays is because the player plays to the hype enough to make it huge. It is perhaps the most ridiculous reasoning behind anything I have heard.
AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace
02-04-2007, 10:37 PM
Did anyone read the Dr. Z article and notice anything weird...when he was talking about cornerbacks...he never mentioned DARRELL GREEN...in my mind, one of the greatest cornerback to play the game...I wonder if he's setting up a future snub...this guy clearly hates the skins
ncskinsfanec
02-04-2007, 10:54 PM
Did anyone read the Dr. Z article and notice anything weird...when he was talking about cornerbacks...he never mentioned DARRELL GREEN...in my mind, one of the greatest cornerback to play the game...I wonder if he's setting up a future snub...this guy clearly hates the skins
Him and Peter King both.
FRPLG
02-04-2007, 10:59 PM
Ole petey supposedly jumped on the Monk bandwagon this year.
ncskinsfanec
02-04-2007, 11:39 PM
Ole petey supposedly jumped on the Monk bandwagon this year.
Oh really? That's good. I just know King has wrote some things I deem unflattering about the Skins and Joe Gibbs in the past. That said, I do enjoy his Monday morning columns.
Luxorreb
02-05-2007, 07:02 AM
Monk not in before Irvin?
F*CKIN' RIDICULOUS!!!
WTF!?!?!?!?!
Irvin is a gun-HOE slappin cocaine enhancin' type of guy. Who had Aikman, #22 and lotsa great players helping him. Art Monk didn't use cocaine and retired with the most catches in a season EVER!
#56fanatic
02-05-2007, 08:36 AM
I dont get the whole 'defining catch' bullsh*t excuse. I can't name one defining catch from just about any reciever. Good WRs have LOTS OF GOOD CATCHES. Monk was no different. And just because he wasn't a media whore ass-clown doesn't mean that he wasn't a brilliant WR. The only reason one remembers signature plays is because the player plays to the hype enough to make it huge. It is perhaps the most ridiculous reasoning behind anything I have heard.
If it takes a signature catch to get voted into the hall of fame, then they are not looking at the individuals body of work as a player. Sports writers have way too much say in who is voted in or not. Former players and actual Hall of Fame members should have some say in who gets in. To say Monk doesn't have what it takes is an injustice to the members in the Hall of fame. He was the leading receiver in NFL history when he retired, let the league in receptions multiple years, single season receptions leader, still 6th all time in receptions. He was nothing but class. Crackpipe willie gets in on his 3rd attempt?? That is a shame to everyone in the hall of fame. How people can leave that room knowing the travisty of not having Monk in the Hall, is beyond me. Totally discrediting to those who votes against him.